Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagdish Chandra Natali (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. clpo13_(talk) 00:03, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jagdish Chandra Natali

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Did get MNZM but that is well down on the list of New Zealand Royal Honours System. Last afd closed keep purely on the strength of that award but since then others have taken a closer look at honours and notability. See User:Necrothesp/Notability criteria for recipients of honours. MNZM falls short of qualifying a recipient for "inherent" notability under WP:ANYBIO #1. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment / query The person is listed in New Zealand who's who Aotearoa (2001) but I do not know that reference book. If it's something well-regarded, like Who's Who in New Zealand was, that could bestow notability. Who can say something about that 2001 reference book? Whilst Necrothesp's work is not official, I certainly concur with what is said on that page regarding inherent notability. With MNZM being a second-level service award, that by itself isn't enough. Schwede 66 09:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who's Who in New Zealand is a good source up until the 1991 edition, Wikipedia:Notability (New Zealand people) (proposed). (even the 1991 edition seems a bit removed from the rest) The one Natali is in is from 2001. After 1991 it was taken over/turned into Aotearoa by Alister Taylor who is NOT a reputable publisher, known for soliciting fees for a non existent publication. So not bestowing notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:54, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Thanks for clarifying the status of the 2001 reference book. I think I had heard that before. For me, that makes this a clear case – notability is not established. Schwede 66 21:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable per nomination NealeFamily (talk) 09:18, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable enough. Norcaes (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.